Has humanity changed? Can it?

  1. Philosophy Forum
  2. » General Discussion
  3. » Has humanity changed? Can it?

Get Email Updates Email this Topic Print this Page

manored
 
Reply Tue 3 Mar, 2009 10:44 am
I believe a massive change in the way people think is necessary to make the world a better place, mainly in what concerns the objectives one helds in life: People should hold global objectives that can never be achieved rather than personal ones that can be achieved. But is such a change possible? Have humans ever done it? I have a difficulties deciding between one of the two, perhaps someone here will be able to help me with this.

So... discuss Smile
 
xris
 
Reply Tue 3 Mar, 2009 11:00 am
@manored,
If we cant do it now with global communication and the obvious necessity to make changes then we never will...We could start it now with the right call to arms message..Deposit our message on every forum within weeks we could be on our way to salvation..If only it was that easy..
 
manored
 
Reply Tue 3 Mar, 2009 11:10 am
@manored,
But, does that really works? We are bombarded with pro-enviroement propaganda ever day, and have been for quite a while, but the enviroement is still condemned as far as I can tell. And the weird part is that most people seen to agree taking care of the enviroement is important. I suspect most people would agree that fighting for the good of all rather than of the self is a good thing, but there would be no results again. Perhaps people actually dont wanna change and keep locked in some kind of mid-term?
 
boagie
 
Reply Tue 3 Mar, 2009 11:11 am
@xris,
YO!Smile

We need to be able to give ourselves permission to take charge of our own destiny, those believing in a supernatural father figure looking after things are not likely to go along with this idea. Neuroscience is unfolding many mysteries to us, what the future might hold is a greater ability to control our own psyches, it should be in the meantime our wish to do so to the measure that we can today with what we do know of ourselves and the impending necessities of the environment.
 
xris
 
Reply Tue 3 Mar, 2009 11:35 am
@boagie,
I always feel like neutered dog chasing my tail for satisfaction.They tell me small ripples make large waves, i dont mind making ripples.I think i did make a difference to nestles outlook by arguing their bad habits where bad for business. If we could convince big business its the right thing to do "save the world" we might be on track. An upsurge in demand for change is coming i can feel it in my old bones.
 
nameless
 
Reply Tue 3 Mar, 2009 02:15 pm
@manored,
manored;51605 wrote:
People should hold global objectives that can never be achieved rather than personal ones that can be achieved.

You suggest that people spend their lives tilting at delusional and impossible windmills? I guess that there are many who already do...

(Long live the Borg!)
 
GoshisDead
 
Reply Tue 3 Mar, 2009 02:31 pm
@nameless,
nameless wrote:
You suggest that people spend their lives tilting at delusional and impossible windmills? I guess that there are many who already do...



That is a true sentiment in some ways. Yet many movements and current cultural realities we consider as positive human rights, ecological triumphs, and political progression were catilyzed by the Don Quixotes of their time.
 
nameless
 
Reply Tue 3 Mar, 2009 02:38 pm
@GoshisDead,
GoshisDead;51631 wrote:
That is a true sentiment in some ways. Yet many movements and current cultural realities we consider as positive human rights, ecological triumphs, and political progression were catilyzed by the Don Quixotes of their time.

Perhaps you missed the qualifier part in "People should hold global objectives that can never be achieved" part of the OP?
 
savagemonk
 
Reply Tue 3 Mar, 2009 06:30 pm
@nameless,
Change would be possible if enough people decide to. And if there was something more beneficial to change into. Right now the masses have all of the needs and luxuries that they want. The eminent things that are going to destroy us are mearly theory to them, and to most scientist, or religion feeders for that matter. So there is no reason for them to change yet.

Everyone is tough until they have a gun in thier face. But the likelihood of it happening to them is slim to none so they count on none to run thier life.

To sum it up humanity will wander the same path until it is forced to change. There must be enough veriables in the situation to cause a mass movement. I manage a reef aquarium which tends to have a lot of metaphors pertaining to life. If I add only one fish at a time within a months duration. All of the perameters stay the same. If I add all of those fish at the same time. The perameters change and force me to take action to rectify the issue.
 
Elmud
 
Reply Tue 3 Mar, 2009 06:37 pm
@manored,
manored wrote:
I believe a massive change in the way people think is necessary to make the world a better place, mainly in what concerns the objectives one helds in life: People should hold global objectives that can never be achieved rather than personal ones that can be achieved. But is such a change possible? Have humans ever done it? I have a difficulties deciding between one of the two, perhaps someone here will be able to help me with this.

So... discuss Smile

Probably a little too much, a little too soon. Not a slow smooth process, but rather, a series of little jumps or leaps. What will be the next little leap? Who knows. Massive change? It is my belief that things just do not work that way.
 
manored
 
Reply Wed 4 Mar, 2009 10:10 am
@nameless,
nameless wrote:
You suggest that people spend their lives tilting at delusional and impossible windmills? I guess that there are many who already do...

(Long live the Borg!)
Impossible, not delusional Smile

For example, my objective in life is to make humanity last forever. That is impossible, as everthing is bound to end someday, but I will work towards it anyway.

Note: Everthing is bound to end from the pratical point of view, from the philosophic one we can argue nothing ends at all.

Elmud wrote:
Probably a little too much, a little too soon. Not a slow smooth process, but rather, a series of little jumps or leaps. What will be the next little leap? Who knows. Massive change? It is my belief that things just do not work that way.
True, but there are some things that do not have middle-terms, they are just huge leaps. Like religious belief: you cant believe half in a religion and half in other (Well, you can, but since most religions reject all others that is unlikely), you just give a huge leap between the two if you change.
 
savagemonk
 
Reply Wed 4 Mar, 2009 12:43 pm
@manored,
manored wrote:
Impossible, not delusional Smile

For example, my objective in life is to make humanity last forever. That is impossible, as everthing is bound to end someday, but I will work towards it anyway.

Note: Everthing is bound to end from the pratical point of view, from the philosophic one we can argue nothing ends at all.

True, but there are some things that do not have middle-terms, they are just huge leaps. Like religious belief: you cant believe half in a religion and half in other (Well, you can, but since most religions reject all others that is unlikely), you just give a huge leap between the two if you change.


Nothing actually ends, merely changes state. Sometimes that state is not what we would prefer but it is change none the less. As for what is the purpose of life "To find purpose"

On a side note not everyone wants to last forever. And we have no control over what our environment does. If the earth becomes an unstable place to sustain human life. Then there is nothing we would beable to do about it. The earth has shed it's skin many times before we where here, and will many times after. It is funny that people think that we have such an impact on this planet that we are the cause of it's changes. There is a lot more pollution in one volcano eruption than we could produce in a year.

I think that we should spend more time enjoying the time that we have now rather than ponder on what might happen. If you spend all your time in the future you loose the present.
 
manored
 
Reply Thu 5 Mar, 2009 11:52 am
@manored,
True. I dont really mind if we dont manage to live forever, like I said, we wont, but trying is cool anyway. Can we develop space travel before earth goes boom? Lets find out Smile

But being good-humored is hard then you are surrounded by people deadly worried about things. Guess I have to try harder on it Smile
 
savagemonk
 
Reply Thu 5 Mar, 2009 12:09 pm
@manored,
manored wrote:
True. I dont really mind if we dont manage to live forever, like I said, we wont, but trying is cool anyway. Can we develop space travel before earth goes boom? Lets find out Smile

But being good-humored is hard then you are surrounded by people deadly worried about things. Guess I have to try harder on it Smile
I will second that. Might as well have fun while we are here. Space sounds fun lets see if we can get ti going. All those ill humored people are just to afraid to find out what is really going down. I have accepted that I am going to die. I just want to learn as much as I can until then. So what ever happens next I am prepared for as much as I can be. So when the boom happens instead of scrambling around the streets in panic I can sit back smoke a joint and be free.
 
Richardgrant
 
Reply Sun 15 Mar, 2009 01:21 am
@Elmud,
I have discovered how to change the world and all things within it. I have moved from an outer sensing body to an inner knowing mind, where I see with inner eyes only. What I see out there is a perfect universe, the unseen being in perfect balance with the seen (material universe) the only thing that can be out of balance is the way my consciousness perceives it, so to change the outer I first must change the inner (the cause) as I have a different perception of myself, the outer changes accordingly
 
savagemonk
 
Reply Sun 15 Mar, 2009 12:06 pm
@Richardgrant,
Richardgrant wrote:
I have discovered how to change the world and all things within it. I have moved from an outer sensing body to an inner knowing mind, where I see with inner eyes only. What I see out there is a perfect universe, the unseen being in perfect balance with the seen (material universe) the only thing that can be out of balance is the way my consciousness perceives it, so to change the outer I first must change the inner (the cause) as I have a different perception of myself, the outer changes accordingly

That is an excellent perception. I have been attempting for years to change the point of view to which I perceive the universe. We tend to look at the world from our eyes out. Seeing the world from the universe in, is a feat that all should try. :shocked:
 
Ennui phil
 
Reply Tue 24 Mar, 2009 08:32 am
@manored,
It cannot be feasible for congruence manored.

Everything is veered, so everything is conservative.

If one needs to preach then everyone should be listening within earshot,but not now or after.
 
doc phil
 
Reply Wed 25 Mar, 2009 12:49 pm
@Ennui phil,
xris;51613 wrote:
If we could convince big business its the right thing to do "save the world" we might be on track. An upsurge in demand for change is coming i can feel it in my old bones.


I feel it too. i disagree that we have to persuade big business. Instead, we merely have to be conscious of our part in the business cycle (the most important part of the process): buying. Through The Power of The Purchase change cannot only happen, but can happen over a short period of time. With information, travel and networking the change is coming. The only question: where were you when the people started deciding? (that is perhaps the scariest part of it - am I doing enough?)

As Manored so poignantly put it:

manored;51972 wrote:

But being good-humored is hard then you are surrounded by people deadly worried about things. Guess I have to try harder on it Smile


Einstein said that humour was a momentary relief from the paralysing sense of responsibility. Humour can change things; people are quite receptive to humour, and more willing to engage the deep stuff. But serious is the situation, and if one wants to see from the universe in, perhaps feeling the sense of greatness and responsibility is part of that journey - it is, afterall, accurate.


manored;51791 wrote:
. Like religious belief: you cant believe half in a religion and half in other (Well, you can, but since most religions reject all others that is unlikely), you just give a huge leap between the two if you change.


Just a point of clarity. Islam believes in the majority of Judiasm and Christianity, I believe. And still there is conflict. Don't think its anything to do with religion, merely another vehicle for the weak to intimidate the strong. And interpretation of religion, what one chooses to represent, is the important part for most, in my opinion. [ and a thought, if we believe in them all, then the days off are: friday, saturday and sunday...thats more like it!]

Doc
 
manored
 
Reply Wed 25 Mar, 2009 03:18 pm
@Ennui phil,
Ennui wrote:
It cannot be feasible for congruence manored.

Everything is veered, so everything is conservative.

If one needs to preach then everyone should be listening within earshot,but not now or after.
I didnt understood this, please elaborate a bit Smile

doc wrote:


Einstein said that humour was a momentary relief from the paralysing sense of responsibility. Humour can change things; people are quite receptive to humour, and more willing to engage the deep stuff. But serious is the situation, and if one wants to see from the universe in, perhaps feeling the sense of greatness and responsibility is part of that journey - it is, afterall, accurate.

Just a point of clarity. Islam believes in the majority of Judiasm and Christianity, I believe. And still there is conflict. Don't think its anything to do with religion, merely another vehicle for the weak to intimidate the strong. And interpretation of religion, what one chooses to represent, is the important part for most, in my opinion. [ and a thought, if we believe in them all, then the days off are: friday, saturday and sunday...thats more like it!]

Doc
Personally I prefer to sit in chair of humour and only ocasionally poke seriousness with a long stick to keep things on course Smile

Religion was just an example of something that cannot change gradually, though since its something quite subjective it may be a bad example. Something more objective: making a machine work. Surely you were learning while trying, but only after succeding you the machine working.
 
doc phil
 
Reply Wed 25 Mar, 2009 06:08 pm
@manored,
Do you prefer humour to truth (not that what I have said is truth)?
 
 

 
  1. Philosophy Forum
  2. » General Discussion
  3. » Has humanity changed? Can it?
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.39 seconds on 05/20/2024 at 01:38:47